Which of the following is NOT an overarching concept that incorporates all the requirements for just administrative action?

The question asks which of the given options is NOT an overarching concept incorporating all the requirements for just administrative action.

Just administrative action, as typically defined in administrative law (e.g., in the South African Constitution and the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, PAJA), requires administrative action to be:

• Lawful: The action must be authorized by law and comply with all legal provisions.
• Reasonable: The action must be rational and justifiable.
• Procedurally fair: The process by which the decision is made must be fair.
• Accompanied by written reasons: When rights are adversely affected, adequate written reasons must be provided.

Let's evaluate the options:

• a) Reasonableness: This is a core requirement for just administrative action.
• b) Judicial precedent: This refers to the principle that courts are bound by previous decisions of higher courts. While judicial precedent is crucial in shaping and interpreting administrative law, it is a principle of the legal system and how courts operate, not a direct requirement that an administrative action itself must satisfy to be considered "just."
• c) Lawfulness: This is a core requirement for just administrative action.
• d) Procedural fairness: This is a core requirement for just administrative action.
• e) Written reasons: This is a core requirement for just administrative action, especially when rights are adversely affected.

Therefore, judicial precedent is the concept that does not directly describe a requirement for an administrative action to be just.

The correct option is b).
$\boxed{\text{b. Judicial precedent}}$